Hey Vincent Back in 2015 there was a community consultation on the topic and it seems that ARIN is finally making progress when it comes to IRR route validation: You might want to read the announcement made in January https://www.arin.net/announcements/2018/20180109.html
Enjoy your weekend! Cheers, Manuel -- Manuel Schweizer cloudscale.ch AG Dörflistrasse 67 CH-8050 Zürich Fon: +41 44 55 222 55 Fax: +41 44 55 222 56 Web: https://www.cloudscale.ch > On 10 Mar 2018, at 23:06, Vincent Bernat <ber...@luffy.cx> wrote: > > ❦ 10 mars 2018 23:02 +0100, Vincent Bernat <ber...@luffy.cx> : > >> I am peering with Atlantic Metro at DE-CIX. Their IRR record is >> "AS-AMC". I have noticed recently some invalid prefixes: >> >> $ bgpq3 -4 -R 24 -m 24 -A -J -E AS-AMC >> [...] >> route-filter 1.0.0.0/24 exact; >> route-filter 1.1.1.0/24 exact; >> >> I didn't check which members of the macro pulled those prefixes (is >> there an easy way to get where it comes from?) but I thought information >> from IRR records were veted by RIR. It seems this is not the case. Is it >> because some RIR don't check anything or just because there is no way to >> secure such a macro? In this case, what is the best practice when >> peering with such a transit provider? > > Those two routes are from CloudFlare (just got it by luck): > > http://irrexplorer.nlnog.net/search/AS13335 > > So ARIN doesn't check anything? > -- > Don't just echo the code with comments - make every comment count. > - The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger) > > > _______________________________________________ > swinog mailing list > swinog@lists.swinog.ch > http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
_______________________________________________ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
